By now, there are a host of recommendations and blueprints available to school leaders when it comes to implementing the Every Student Succeeds Act. But a study released last month suggests that when it comes to using evidence to improve schools, state and local leaders don鈥檛 always have to go for the most demanding option.
The , a research and advocacy group, highlights 鈥渇ive ways to prioritize evidence in state and local spending decisions.鈥� In its 鈥淓ducation Roadmap,鈥� the group says K-12 leaders should try to ensure that there is a 鈥渃ommon definition of evidence鈥� across education programs and practices. And there should also be an emphasis on prioritizing evidence when awarding contracts for goods and services, the group says.
But leaders shouldn鈥檛 just stubbornly mandate or push those approaches, Results for America says. In fact, for each of its five recommendations, its report puts possible actions into two buckets: a 鈥渓ighter lift鈥� approach for districts that may have relatively slim central offices and resources available to them, and a 鈥渉eavier lift鈥� version for those with bigger budgets and more, better-trained personnel.
For example, the report鈥檚 second recommendation is to 鈥減rioritize evidence of effectiveness when allocating federal and state education funds to school districts and schools.鈥� However, Results for America also sounds a note of caution about this: 鈥淪ome states may witness an unintended consequence of steering dollars toward evidence-based programs and practices, namely that it can exacerbate equity gaps. High-capacity districts (or other funding applicants) with extra time and resources can more easily show they are using evidence-based approaches or spend money on evaluations, while smaller or lower-capacity districts/applicants may be unsure where to begin.鈥�
The report鈥檚 鈥渓ighter lift鈥� and 鈥渉eavier lift鈥� options for that second recommendation are as follows:
Lighter Lift
- Give applicants for federal and state competitive grant funds preference points or an absolute priority if they propose investing those funds in evidence-based programs and practices.
- Require applicants for all types of federal and state education funds to describe in their applications how they will use evidence-based programs and practices and promote continuous improvement.
Heavier Lift
- Incentivize or require (when allowed) applicants for federal and state noncompetitive funds to invest a portion or all of their funds in evidence-based programs and practices.
- Provide applicants for federal and state noncompetitive funds, who agree to use evidence-based programs and practices additional federal or state competitive funds or preference points for those funds.
Rural schools can have a particularly difficult time finding and implementing evidence-based school turnaround strategies, as my Politics K-12 co-author Evie Blad wrote recently. For example, one school administrator in Tennessee said he tends to trust plans he hears about from other rural K-12 leaders: 鈥淗onestly, rural folks are skeptical of outsiders in the sense that we want to build a trust with people. ... That word-of-mouth goes a long way. It gives you that extra confidence.鈥� (As Evie wrote earlier this week, rural school and face a host of challenges.)
.